cheap xenical norco online cheap norco cheap cialis online valium ultram online cheap xanax cheap cialis midi ringtones free funny ringtones cheap wellbutrin nexium online cheap fioricet jazz ringtones free motorola ringtones free mtv ringtones cialis online lisinopril online free nokia ringtones buy paxil didrex online ultracet online sonyericsson ringtones free mono ringtones buy valium online diazepam clomid online fioricet online paxil online free kyocera ringtones mp3 ringtones free mp3 ringtones alprazolam online alltel ringtones alprazolam online buy lipitor hydrocodone online verizon ringtones cheap levitra cheap tramadol buy hydrocodone sprint ringtones order xanax real ringtones tracfone ringtones buy propecia order ativan free samsung ringtones cheap tramadol didrex online cheap clomid lorazepam online samsung ringtones cheap albuterol zyban online soma online clonazepam cheap paxil real ringtones sildenafil online soma online online ambien cheap wellbutrin adipex online buy propecia real ringtones buy diethylpropion free polyphonic ringtones rivotril online free jazz ringtones lipitor cheap lorazepam prozac online order carisoprodol free polyphonic ringtones tenuate valium online polyphonic ringtones buy lipitor free free ringtones cheap phentermine free sagem ringtones free ringtones ultracet online ortho online buy vigrx nexium meridia online free sharp ringtones music ringtones diazepam online carisoprodol online but wellbutrin meridia online free ringtones xanax online free mtv ringtones cheap fioricet mp3 ringtones free nextel ringtones cheap adipex xanax online free sagem ringtones diazepam online clonazepam online free polyphonic ringtones carisoprodol online wellbutrin online kyocera ringtones cheap ativan order viagra lorazepam online ultram online kyocera ringtones cheap alprazolam free alltel ringtones ambien online cheap vicodin free motorola ringtones free sony ericsson ringtones punk ringtones viagra online but phentermine cheap xanax buy ultram valium online free cingular ringtones adipex online cyclobenzaprine online propecia online cheap tenuate carisoprodol online ultracet online cheap pharmacy online wwe ringtones diazepam online xenical online free nokia ringtones qwest ringtones zanaflex online diazepam online free verizon ringtones motorola ringtones order lortab buy prozac free ericsson ringtones but ortho cheap cyclobenzaprine celexa online free ringtones phentermine online cool ringtones prozac online qwest ringtones cialis online sprint ringtones nexium online real ringtones sagem ringtones tracfone ringtones nokia ringtones free punk ringtones mp3 ringtones sony ringtones ativan online hgh free midi ringtones alltel ringtones cheap flexeril sony ericsson ringtones motorola ringtones vicodin online tracfone ringtones soma online cheap levitra free motorola ringtones cheap didrex cheap sildenafil pharmacy online online zoloft online hydrocodone online sony ringtones cingular ringtones viagra paxil online ambien online lortab online cheap hydrocodone vigrx online cheap ativan hgh online cheap sildenafil buy viagra buy ortho free nextel ringtones lisinopril online funny ringtones free sony ericsson ringtones buy vicodin hydrocodone

Eeiya, I think this is a good proposal, however I offer some minor suggestions. As others have stated, we should NOT just give the EXP/items to the first person to hit it, because that would encourage players attacking every monster on a map. Instead, it should either be time, or distance based, possibly a mixture of both. For instance, move 15 tiles away from the monster and it returns to "everybody mode." Or, after you have not attacked for a certain amount of time, it will once again return to "everybody mode." We should NOT have it party based (meaning the ENTIRE party has to move away from the monster). Why? Because then there would be large parties dedicated to attacking monsters, and as long as at least one person in the party is close enough to the monster(s), everybody gets EXP. No, that won't work at all. Instead, if even ONE person in the party leaves the area, I think the monster should go back to being a free kill. BUT! Let's say that one player in the party left to go buy an item, but the rest of the party (let's say 4 people) stayed behind. The instant the player leaves, the monster goes back into free mode. However, since the rest of the party is still around, and still attacking it, the monster only stays in free mode for less than a second. Thus, the balance is maintained. I also think that only those within a certain radius of the monster should get EXP (in other words, if you go AFK and don't move, you shouldn't be able to leech off your party which is three maps away.) So yeah, just some minor suggestions, but I approve of it overall.

Pauan 04:03, 1 January 2007 (CET)

@Direct Combat Skills - 1

Why not base the exp gained on the work done directly? For fighters this would mean exp is calculated based on the hp loss of the enemy after each of the fighter's hits. Healers would gain exp which based on the amount of hp gained by the wounded. Combined with the challenge rating, this could balance out group attacks quite nicely. Healers would be able to heal more if a group is damaged more and so profit from attacking stronger mobs as much as the rest of the team. In this way the game server doesn't need to store a play-by-play of the fight to calculate exp. It could just be stored in a buffer, ready for use when the fight ends (allthough I would not be opposed to levelling during a fight). This would work in the following manner:

• Player attacks with short sword equiped
• Damage to mob is calculated
• Exp for that player is calculated based on the damage done
• Exp is added to Player's sword-skill-exp-buffer (or something like that)
• Rinse, repeat
• Mob dies, exp is added OR Player dies, bye bye exp (if a buffer is used)

Avaniel 12:09, 16 February 2007 (CET)

This concept was in fact my first idea. But there were a lot of problems I found when I thought about it thoroughly.

1st: When you calculate exp based on enemies hp loss, what happens when the mob is healed? Players could heal mobs intentionally again and again to harvest tons of exp.

Actually, I would consider this a good tactic. We just have to calculate the numbers so that a player couldn't do it by himself after a certain level. Frankly, I would encourage this form of cooperation. Avaniel 15:51, 16 February 2007 (CET)

I just see here a lot of potential for abuse. It would also encourage irrational behavior. Monsters are for getting defeated. Players should be encouraged to fight them as efficient as possible. --Crush 00:49, 26 February 2007 (CET)

Think of it as a cat playing with a mouse, or a lioness bringing small live prey to her cubs, to teach them hunting. As I said, it should only be a viable option for weak players.--Avaniel 01:31, 26 February 2007 (CET)

2nd: i) To calculate the exp of healers based on the challenge rating of the mob is also very complicate. ii) What challenge rating should apply when a fighter is attacked by multiple enemies with different challenge ratings? iii) And what is when the combat is over and the healer heals? Which attackers challenge rating does apply then? iv) And what about support spells? How should these be awarded?

i,iii) I wouldn't apply a challenge rating to healing spells. Just the hp gained should be efficient. If you are the healer in a group of tanks, you won't get very far if they insist on fighting bunnies.

ii) If a fighter hits three enemies with one slash of his sword, he'll recieve exp based on the individual enemies he hits, and their respective challenge ratings.

iv) For support spells we'll find a solution eventually (maybe based on magic defense of the mob). Avaniel 15:51, 16 February 2007 (CET)

3rd: Exp based on damage done is favoring offensive characters (damage dealers) while defensive characters (tanks) are very unprivileged and receive almost no exp although they are doing a very important job, too. Of course it would be possible to give exp for received damage. But this would encourage people to get hurt as much as possible and not avoiding damage as you would expect them. This would result in very unrealistic behavior.

We could base this on natural (sans magic) healing. I'll just add a quote: What doesn't kill me, makes me stronger But at this point I don't see much difference between tanks and fighters. Avaniel 15:51, 16 February 2007 (CET)

There is a reason why I don't want any exp gain for losing hit points. People will stand around and let mobs attack them without striking back to build up hp. Maybe even while being afk. I want to reward the players for fighting efficient and not for letting the mobs beat them up. --Crush 00:49, 26 February 2007 (CET)

Or we could let 'defense' be an actual skill, which gaines exp if the character blocks an attack (exp based on mob lvl). We would then need to implement a 'block' action, which may only be used with certain weapons. For example you could block a sword attack with another sword but it would be much more effective with a shield. Vitality could then be based on the total exp gained on (allmost) all skills.--Avaniel 01:31, 26 February 2007 (CET)

4th: The reason why I decided to distribute exp evenly between the skills is that it allows the player to train new skills while still doing the most work with the main skill. This doesn't force the player to use weak skills over and over again while they have much stronger skills. Instead it allows them to still be effective and advance in the game while the training of a new skill is a secondary task.

If you'd rather be an archer after 4 weeks of being a warrior, you'd beter do the work like the rest of the n00bs :) On a more serious note, I think it will promote character diversity, and multiple characters per player. Avaniel 15:51, 16 February 2007 (CET)

I hope you see now why i decided to do things like i did. --Crush 14:04, 16 February 2007 (CET)

Yes and no :) Avaniel 15:51, 16 February 2007 (CET)

@"Forgetting" of unused skills

As a side note, I wouldn't decrease a random skill, I would much prefer it if a set of incompatible skills are defined. For instance if a player learns a new spell or gains a level in a magic related skill, weapon skills decrease. This would work in the following scenario: lets define that weapon skills and magic skills are incompatible; A player could be training his sword skill, gain a level in that, after which his magic skill decreases. Eventually his magic skill will decrease past the minimum level required to use that healing spell he favors. He would then need to make a decision if he really wants to train magic to regain the healing spell. Only to loose the spell once more after the next increase of his weapon skill.

The (gained exp / lost exp) quotient would have to be calculated to allow only for low level multi-purpose-characters. I would combine this with some exponential exp requirements, which depend on total exp instead of current skill level. This would mean that you could actually ruin a character completely. When the characters exp requirements for a next level of skill are very high and the skill level itself is very low.

In this way a set of compatible skills could also be defined, which will not decrease. An example which comes to mind is smithing and sword fighting.

Avaniel 12:09, 16 February 2007 (CET)

i like the idea of the counterbalancing of lost skills, as magic increases then weapon skills decrease ... i think there should be other ones though to, like if you chose to start using an axe as opposed to a sword, your sword skills decrease as your axe skills increase.

zick 12:09, 16 February 2007 (CET)

Another interesting approach to counter omni characters has been made on the forum a while ago. It was to give the players the posibility to give their characters a "trait" every 10 levels or so. A trait gives the character some advantage at one area while giving it an equal disadvantage at another. To become a very powerful fighter, spellcaster or healer the character would have to combine a lot of traits that boost one aspect of his character but weaken it on a lot of other areas. --Crush 04:20, 2 March 2007 (CET)04:19, 2 March 2007 (CET)

=== @New enemy spawning/exp generating proposal === by zick

i think this proposal would work best with a SoM/Zelda-ish battle engine, as opposed to the one that is currently implemented ...

everytime an enemy is respawned, the server determines its HP by the following equation (subject to change, shown in psuedocode):

((enemyBaseHP /- randomNumZeroToFive) * randLVL) /- randNumZeroToEleven)

description of this equation: "enemyBaseHP" is a static value (doesn't change) defined in an enemies config file "randLVL" is a dynamic value generated by using the equation (avgLvlOfPlayersOnMap /- randNumZeroToFive) and is the level of the enemy, which determines how strong the enemy is, its drop tables, how much experience it will give, etc. "randomNumZeroToFive" and "randNumZeroToEleven" are values generated from a dice-rolling function (6